This looks good to me, but I'm always a little wary of uninscribed cuts. Does anyone see any red flags?

Tags: Beatles, John, Lennon, The

Views: 1028

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

The OP has the dots you often see at the top of John's loops but they all have a rather deliberate look about them (all at "5 mins. to 12.00" and of the same size). Also, I don't think you often see so many in one autograph.

Thanks for your thoughts. To be clear, are you suggesting the similarity is a good thing or that you believe it's a good copy of the autograph Ballroom posted? 

Is either genuine?

The similarity is not thought to be a good thing in this case as doubts have been raised about the exemplar Ballroom posted. Personally, I see as many differences as similarities but something about the OP does bother me, in particular the ink dots (as per my post above). 

Thanks for clearing that up. I'm not familiar with the Scream Magazine example, but assume that was discussed in another thread on here? If anyone has the link that would be appreciated. 

Thanks!

It is a long thread, it has no apparent conclusion (as many of the best threads) and some video data was removed that showed how one could take a signature, make a digital file and alter it with minor variations using software to create a new example signed by a plotter or other device with any pen. What I saw showed me that one could make yet another signature..

Jeez! I worry about the future of the hobby when tech is making things like that possible. 

The 4 dots are in the same position on the H, L, and both Es. It does appear to be machine signed. We would need to see a large, sharp photo to be able to tell what they probably used. 

The OP sold for £460 + BP which means there was substantial doubt there. 

could those dots indicate that these two signatures came out of the same machine?

RSS

© 2024   Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service